NFC East: DAL | NYG | PHI
| WAS
NFC North: CHI
| DET | GB | MIN
With two weeks of PSAs under our belts, hopefully each of you has
had a chance to dissect the AFC. Two weeks ago, we discussed the
AFC East and AFC North.
Last week, it was time to take on the other half of the AFC –
the South and the West.
And before that, we had a chance to project the defensive
effectiveness of each team as well.
Without a doubt, this week represents the toughest set of projections
I will attempt during this four-part series. If it is not the
RB situations that exist in the backfields of the Cowboys, Giants
and Redskins, then it is trying to figure out just how much Mike
Martz will change the landscape in Chicago or predicting whether
or not Brett Favre will report after training camp, during the
season or not at all.
As I have in each of the first two PSAs, allow me to clear up
a couple of misconceptions about my schedule analysis approach
right away:
- this is not a strength of schedule article that uses 2009
results to predict 2010 and
- the schedule contributes to the projection of a player in
this system, but it is far from the only determining factor
I use.
This is the third of four straight articles in which I will be
posting my game-by-game predictions, two divisions at a time.
Bear in mind that while the final numbers are important, they
are 15-game totals because most fantasy seasons have a Week 16
title game. For those unfamiliar with the way I project player
stats and individual week-to-week consistency (or for those who
need a refresher), please give this article a read for an introductory
course in Preseason Schedule Analysis.
Much like any system that projects future performance, each year
gives me the opportunity to tweak and hopefully improve the product.
After making the ability to personalize each matchup my focus
last season, I hope to add volatility to the mix in 2010. By "volatility",
I mean: 1) accessing whether my projection represents the ceiling
or floor for a given player to operate in this season and 2) understanding
that at least one-third of the teams will make a QB change at
some point and about the same percentage of NFL starting RBs will
not make it through the 16-game schedule (only 19 RBs with more
than 100 carries played all 16 games last season). As such, I
will judiciously add injury layoffs to players who I feel are
significant injury risks. I also feel it necessary to state that
my projections are subject to change. Fear not, however, as I
will release my final projections and rankings in late August.
However, the next few weeks should give all interested parties
a pretty good idea of just how strongly I feel about a player's
prospects for the upcoming season.
Perhaps more important than the final numbers for each player,
though, are the highlighted matchups. Note that I have applied
the green highlights (good matchups) to the players who I feel
should take advantage of that matchup and the red highlights (bad
matchups) to the ones that will be difficult - but not impossible
- for that player. Only a handful of defenses merit bad matchups
all over the board (the Steelers, Packers, Jets and Bengals all
qualify for the most part this year), however, just because a
player’s box is "red" one week doesn't mean the
player won't put up his usual numbers just as a "green"
doesn't necessarily mean he will. Furthermore, one WR can have
a "red" matchup but the rest of his team could be neutral
or green. For instance, when the Jets put CB Darrelle Revis on
the opponent's #1 WR, it will qualify as a bad matchup only for
the #1 WR, not necessarily for the rest of the passing game. Therefore,
a QB, WR or TE will only be considered positive/negative if I
don't think he can win his individual matchup.
Before we dive into the projections, let me revisit the volatility
I spoke of earlier. In the blue vertical column to the right of
my projection, I will place a sign (explained below) as to how
much upside or downside a player has this season. Here is the
key I will be using over the next four weeks, with no sign by
a player’s name suggesting I feel I am projecting the player
accurately:
(^) - Projection represents
the player’s floor; he has significant upside.
(+) - Projection may be selling
the player short; he has some upside.
(-) - Projection may be overselling
the player; he is a slight risk.
(!) – Projection represents
the player’s ceiling; he is a significant risk.
Note: The grey
highlight in each team’s schedule reflects a road game.
NFC EAST
Dallas Cowboys |
|
Totals |
|
WAS |
CHI |
HOU |
bye |
TEN |
MIN |
NYG |
JAX |
GB |
NYG |
DET |
NO |
IND |
PHI |
WAS |
ARI |
(Run) |
|
|
8.2 |
8.3 |
7.8 |
|
7.8 |
9.4 |
8.3 |
6.7 |
9.4 |
8.3 |
6.4 |
7.4 |
7.6 |
8 |
8.2 |
8.5 |
(Pass) |
|
|
7.4 |
8.3 |
7.5 |
|
7.5 |
8.2 |
8.9 |
7.6 |
8.3 |
8.9 |
5.8 |
7.8 |
8.8 |
8.2 |
7.4 |
7.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tony Romo |
4370 |
+ |
280 |
340 |
285 |
|
265 |
310 |
285 |
340 |
225 |
275 |
325 |
290 |
250 |
290 |
310 |
300 |
TD |
29 |
|
1 |
3 |
3 |
|
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
INT |
11 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Ru Yards |
150 |
|
15 |
10 |
5 |
|
0 |
15 |
25 |
0 |
15 |
10 |
0 |
15 |
10 |
10 |
5 |
15 |
Ru TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marion Barber |
850 |
|
70 |
55 |
90 |
|
40 |
40 |
100 |
35 |
INJ |
25 |
50 |
80 |
100 |
40 |
50 |
75 |
Ru TD |
8 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
INJ |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
170 |
|
20 |
5 |
15 |
|
0 |
10 |
25 |
10 |
INJ |
15 |
0 |
20 |
10 |
15 |
0 |
25 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
22 |
|
2 |
1 |
2 |
|
0 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
INJ |
2 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Felix Jones |
730 |
- |
50 |
35 |
65 |
|
75 |
30 |
35 |
INJ |
INJ |
50 |
80 |
55 |
35 |
115 |
65 |
40 |
Ru TD |
5 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
INJ |
INJ |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
Re Yards |
240 |
|
15 |
15 |
30 |
|
15 |
15 |
10 |
INJ |
INJ |
10 |
20 |
25 |
5 |
45 |
25 |
10 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
INJ |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
27 |
|
2 |
1 |
3 |
|
2 |
2 |
1 |
INJ |
INJ |
1 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
5 |
3 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tashard Choice |
415 |
+ |
15 |
25 |
10 |
|
35 |
15 |
5 |
60 |
75 |
60 |
40 |
15 |
25 |
5 |
15 |
15 |
Ru TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
110 |
|
15 |
10 |
0 |
|
5 |
10 |
0 |
20 |
15 |
5 |
0 |
5 |
5 |
0 |
15 |
5 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
16 |
|
2 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Miles Austin |
1250 |
|
80 |
110 |
85 |
|
55 |
70 |
85 |
120 |
35 |
75 |
125 |
80 |
55 |
90 |
75 |
110 |
Re TD |
8 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
86 |
|
5 |
8 |
6 |
|
3 |
5 |
6 |
8 |
4 |
6 |
8 |
5 |
4 |
7 |
6 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roy Williams |
490 |
- |
35 |
45 |
20 |
|
35 |
55 |
35 |
25 |
50 |
20 |
55 |
30 |
30 |
INJ |
35 |
20 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
35 |
|
2 |
3 |
2 |
|
3 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
INJ |
3 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dez Bryant |
725 |
|
25 |
40 |
50 |
|
85 |
40 |
35 |
40 |
35 |
85 |
25 |
55 |
60 |
35 |
60 |
55 |
Re TD |
5 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
55 |
|
2 |
3 |
5 |
|
5 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
6 |
2 |
5 |
5 |
2 |
5 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Crayton |
255 |
|
10 |
15 |
20 |
|
0 |
15 |
40 |
15 |
30 |
0 |
10 |
25 |
15 |
30 |
10 |
20 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
23 |
|
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
0 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jason Witten |
1015 |
+ |
80 |
90 |
65 |
|
60 |
80 |
55 |
100 |
45 |
65 |
75 |
40 |
55 |
75 |
85 |
45 |
Re TD |
8 |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
Rec |
88 |
|
6 |
8 |
6 |
|
5 |
7 |
5 |
8 |
4 |
5 |
7 |
4 |
6 |
6 |
7 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Martellus Bennett |
115 |
|
0 |
10 |
0 |
|
10 |
15 |
0 |
10 |
15 |
0 |
15 |
10 |
15 |
0 |
5 |
10 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
12 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
Run: Until the day Dallas does
us all a favor and names a clear-cut starter at RB, fantasy owners
are left with either tag-teaming Barber and Jones on their fantasy
teams (thereby filling up two starting spots on your roster each
week) and hoping both players don’t succumb to injury (a
likely occurrence) OR they can avoid the situation and watch the
duo combine for over 2,000 total yards on an offense that should
be among the best in the league. In other words, my advice would
be to make sure you have draft both of them or avoid them entirely.
The season begins with three neutral matchups, although the first
one comes against division rival Washington, which almost always
makes for good TV. Chicago, Houston and Tennessee (Weeks 2, 3
and 5) each have the potential to give the Dallas rushing attack
fits, but it is hard to imagine the Cowboys not being in a position
to pound away against each of those defenses late in the game.
The most difficult portion of the running schedule begins in
Week 6 in Minnesota and doesn’t get much better the following
week in a home game vs. the Giants. The Jags possess the start
of a solid run defense up the middle, but lack the depth and safety
play needed to keep Barber and Jones in check all game long. The
tough stretch ends with consecutive road games against the Packers
and Giants before letting up considerably in home dates vs. Detroit
and New Orleans. The final quarter of the slate is neutral matchup-wise,
although a Week 13 road game in Indianapolis may force the Cowboys
to abandon the run game early in order to keep up with the Colts’
offense on the scoreboard. Jones is a solid bet once again vs.
Philly in Week 14 – the same defense that had no answer
for him two straight weeks last season in convincing Dallas victories.
Wrapping up the fantasy schedule, it is notable that each of the
teams Dallas faces during the final two weeks of fantasy playoffs
(Redskins and Cardinals) each will play a 3-4 defense and both
should be league average or better at stuffing the run.
Pass: Assuming Bryant’s ankle
injury early in training camp isn’t a sign of things to
come, the Cowboys should have more than enough weapons to overcome
just about every difficult matchup they face this season. For
example, the Redskins and Bears (Weeks 1-2) are more than capable
defenses that should be able to pressure the QB and play respectably
on the back end of the defense, but neither defense will have
an answer for Austin, Bryant AND Witten. Houston (Week 3) should
probably be given a green as well as Brian Cushing will be missed
– this pre-bye stretch should serve as a springboard to
what could easily a career fantasy season for Witten. (In fact,
Witten doesn’t face a worthy opponent until Week 9.) The
fun continues after the bye for Romo against a young and vulnerable
Titans secondary (once you get past CB Cortland Finnegan) and
a Vikings’ run defense that will force the Cowboys to throw
all day long in all likelihood.
The Giants’ contests (Week 7) could easily be a carbon
copy of the Vikings’ game if DC Perry Fewell gets as much
out of his players as I expect, but the passing game should get
some relief the next week against the highly questionable pass
rush of the Jags. The hardest part of the fantasy slate comes
over the next two games (Weeks 9-10) on the road against the highly-effective
blitzing defenses of the Packers and Giants. The Cowboys catch
a break the following week in a home tilt vs. a suspect Lions
pass defense but must face another blitz-happy defense like New
Orleans in Week 12. Indianapolis (Week 13) should represent a
bonanza of fantasy points, but playing the Colts on the road often
has the opposite effect for owners counting on passing yards and
TDs. The Cowboys face the Eagles for the first time all season
in Week 14 before wrapping the season with fantasy playoff matchups
vs. the Redskins and the Cardinals. Each team will play a 3-4
defense and provide at least one edge rusher who will attempt
to terrorize RT Marc Columbo, who will need to prove his health
all season long after being rushed back last season from injury
and performing badly in the team’s playoff loss to Minnesota.
New York Giants |
|
Totals |
|
CAR |
IND |
TEN |
CHI |
HOU |
DET |
DAL |
bye |
SEA |
DAL |
PHI |
JAX |
WAS |
MIN |
PHI |
GB |
(Run) |
|
|
5.8 |
7.6 |
7.8 |
8.3 |
7.8 |
6.4 |
8.8 |
|
7.5 |
8.8 |
8 |
6.7 |
8.2 |
9.4 |
8 |
9.4 |
(Pass) |
|
|
7.1 |
8.8 |
7.5 |
8.3 |
7.5 |
5.8 |
7.8 |
|
8 |
7.8 |
8.2 |
7.6 |
7.4 |
8.2 |
8.2 |
8.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eli Manning |
3675 |
|
230 |
235 |
310 |
240 |
300 |
230 |
235 |
|
205 |
235 |
270 |
255 |
175 |
290 |
280 |
185 |
TD |
24 |
|
3 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
1 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
INT |
13 |
|
0 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brandon Jacobs |
1000 |
+ |
115 |
85 |
50 |
65 |
70 |
90 |
70 |
|
INJ |
85 |
60 |
45 |
55 |
60 |
85 |
65 |
Ru TD |
10 |
|
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
INJ |
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Re Yards |
100 |
|
10 |
5 |
0 |
5 |
10 |
0 |
15 |
|
INJ |
5 |
15 |
0 |
10 |
5 |
10 |
10 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
INJ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
17 |
|
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
|
INJ |
1 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ahmad Bradshaw |
885 |
+ |
100 |
60 |
80 |
50 |
55 |
80 |
45 |
|
75 |
40 |
75 |
100 |
INJ |
35 |
55 |
35 |
Ru TD |
5 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
275 |
|
25 |
15 |
45 |
0 |
20 |
15 |
15 |
|
25 |
15 |
25 |
5 |
INJ |
15 |
15 |
40 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
25 |
|
2 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
|
3 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
INJ |
2 |
1 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Danny Ware |
125 |
|
10 |
10 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
15 |
0 |
|
35 |
0 |
0 |
10 |
20 |
5 |
10 |
10 |
Ru TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
75 |
|
0 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
10 |
0 |
5 |
20 |
20 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
11 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Smith |
1095 |
|
45 |
55 |
80 |
75 |
110 |
65 |
80 |
|
75 |
60 |
75 |
80 |
60 |
110 |
75 |
50 |
Re TD |
6 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
88 |
|
4 |
7 |
6 |
7 |
10 |
5 |
7 |
|
6 |
5 |
7 |
6 |
4 |
7 |
4 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hakeem Nicks |
1000 |
+ |
70 |
50 |
105 |
45 |
75 |
65 |
75 |
|
50 |
70 |
90 |
60 |
45 |
100 |
50 |
50 |
Re TD |
7 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
71 |
|
4 |
4 |
6 |
3 |
6 |
5 |
6 |
|
3 |
5 |
6 |
5 |
3 |
7 |
4 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mario Manningham |
470 |
|
35 |
75 |
50 |
60 |
INJ |
INJ |
20 |
|
35 |
50 |
0 |
40 |
20 |
25 |
35 |
25 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
INJ |
INJ |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
25 |
|
2 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
INJ |
INJ |
1 |
|
3 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ramses Barden |
180 |
^ |
10 |
5 |
0 |
15 |
35 |
20 |
0 |
|
0 |
30 |
0 |
20 |
0 |
15 |
30 |
0 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
14 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
|
0 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Boss |
390 |
|
35 |
25 |
20 |
30 |
25 |
55 |
10 |
|
10 |
5 |
50 |
30 |
20 |
20 |
45 |
10 |
Re TD |
4 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
37 |
|
4 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
|
1 |
1 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Travis Beckum |
90 |
|
0 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
25 |
10 |
20 |
|
0 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
15 |
0 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
7 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
Note: It is being widely reported that Jacobs is in competition
with Bradshaw for the starting job, although unlike other RB “competitions”,
the only competition is for the rushing yards. Jacobs will remain
the goal-line back as long as he is healthy. Run:
For those owners looking for an opportunity to ride a player or
two to get through the first third of the season in hopes of bringing
home a bounty before the schedule gets difficult, look no further
than Jacobs and Bradshaw. The Giants catch a huge break in the
first quarter of the season, drawing three of their first four
games at home and getting to start against the defense I feel
will be the worst run-stopping team this season in Carolina. Weeks
2-3 could each feature worthy run-stopping defenses, but if New
York shows the brute force on the offensive line and Jacobs doesn’t
get hurt early like he did last season, neither the Colts nor
Titans should be able to withstand a full game of the Giants’
backfield. Houston (Week 5) will be another league-average run-stopping
defense that will just be getting back OLB Brian Cushing after
his four-game suspension. Detroit (Week 6) is yet another opportunity
for the Giants to pound away at a below-average defense, although
it would be foolish to expect the Lions to be anywhere near as
pathetic stopping the run this season as they were in 2009. Dallas
finally ends the six-game run of 4-3 defenses in Week 7, but the
Cowboys and their 3-4 defensive scheme is hardly a mystery to
their hated rivals.
After the Week 8 bye, the Giants head up to Seattle and its decided
home-field advantage at Qwest Field before facing the Cowboys
for the second time in four weeks in Week 10 – this time
at home. Philadelphia (Week 11) checks in as the fourth consecutive
team that should give the Giants’ run game a pretty serious
challenge, be it due to talent or home-field advantage. Jacksonville
(Week 12) could also be a stout run defense if its DT tandem of
Terrance Knighton and Tyson Alualu has gelled by then, but I fear
the Jags’ safety play will haunt them vs. Bradshaw’s
game-breaking speed. And the last quarter (Weeks 13-16) of the
fantasy season does New York no favors either – particularly
the fantasy playoffs – as the Giants face the two best run
defenses in the league (in my estimation) in Weeks 14 and 16 with
a talented division opponent sandwiched in between. All in all,
I would not want to have to rely on either Giants’ RB in
December.
Pass: I expect New York to return
to its roots as a mauling, physical run team that will lean heavily
on Jacobs, Bradshaw and the defense in 2010. However, last year
proved Manning can post some significant fantasy numbers when
necessary and HC Tom Coughlin has stated this offseason he’ll
continue to put more on Manning’s plate as long as he is
up to the challenge. As mentioned above in the “run”
section, Manning & Co. kick off the year facing six straight
4-3 defenses – none of which should be as good as the defense
the Giants will practice against. Manning, Smith and Nicks should
all reap the benefits during this time, as only the Colts and
Bears should provide any resistance, provided New York doesn’t
choose to feature the run in those games. Again, just as I mentioned
in the above paragraph, the schedule takes a turn for the worst
in Week 7 when the Giants visit Dallas, although it should be
noted that recent New York-Dallas games have been wildly unpredictable
contests.
Following the bye, an improved Seahawks secondary at home could
rattle the Giants’ receiving corps in Week 9. The Giants
then take another crack against the Cowboys’ stout blitzing
defense again in Week 10 before they get their first look of the
season against the equally aggressive Eagles’ blitz the
next week. The pass schedule lightens up ever so slightly over
the next two weeks in home games vs. the Jags and Redskins, but
wraps up in a terrible way during the fantasy playoffs. Minnesota’s
run defense may force the Giants to pass all day in the Metrodome,
but the elements may be a factor (as will the defenses) in Weeks
15 and 16 against the complex blitz schemes of the Eagles and
Packers.
Philadelphia Eagles |
|
Totals |
|
GB |
DET |
JAX |
WAS |
SF |
ATL |
TEN |
bye |
IND |
WAS |
NYG |
CHI |
HOU |
DAL |
NYG |
MIN |
(Run) |
|
|
9.4 |
6.4 |
6.7 |
8.2 |
8.9 |
6.6 |
7.8 |
|
7.6 |
8.2 |
8.3 |
8.3 |
7.8 |
8.8 |
8.3 |
9.4 |
(Pass) |
|
|
8.3 |
5.8 |
7.6 |
7.4 |
7.9 |
7.7 |
7.5 |
|
8.8 |
7.4 |
8.9 |
8.3 |
7.5 |
7.8 |
8.9 |
8.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Kolb |
3815 |
- |
235 |
365 |
310 |
170 |
225 |
INJ |
290 |
|
210 |
280 |
310 |
260 |
315 |
230 |
295 |
320 |
TD |
21 |
|
1 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
INJ |
2 |
|
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
INT |
15 |
|
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
INJ |
0 |
|
2 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Vick |
490 |
+ |
10 |
0 |
20 |
40 |
55 |
245 |
0 |
|
15 |
0 |
30 |
0 |
20 |
15 |
0 |
40 |
TD |
5 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
INT |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Ru Yards |
245 |
|
5 |
30 |
15 |
0 |
20 |
40 |
10 |
|
20 |
10 |
10 |
40 |
25 |
5 |
0 |
15 |
Ru TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LeSean McCoy |
815 |
- |
50 |
65 |
40 |
70 |
50 |
70 |
40 |
|
65 |
35 |
55 |
70 |
65 |
40 |
70 |
30 |
Ru TD |
5 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
420 |
|
30 |
20 |
25 |
15 |
25 |
50 |
35 |
|
20 |
35 |
30 |
25 |
20 |
15 |
45 |
30 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
53 |
|
4 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
|
3 |
5 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Bell |
380 |
|
30 |
45 |
25 |
20 |
35 |
15 |
30 |
|
25 |
40 |
10 |
25 |
25 |
10 |
30 |
15 |
Ru TD |
5 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Re Yards |
25 |
|
0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
10 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
4 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DeSean Jackson |
1085 |
! |
50 |
110 |
80 |
45 |
75 |
85 |
30 |
|
20 |
60 |
120 |
75 |
90 |
40 |
80 |
125 |
Re TD |
7 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
Rec |
73 |
|
4 |
6 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
7 |
2 |
|
1 |
3 |
7 |
7 |
8 |
2 |
6 |
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Maclin |
1005 |
|
70 |
110 |
70 |
60 |
70 |
35 |
85 |
|
50 |
45 |
85 |
30 |
65 |
60 |
70 |
100 |
Re TD |
5 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
60 |
|
5 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
2 |
6 |
|
3 |
2 |
6 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jason Avant |
560 |
|
40 |
50 |
35 |
50 |
40 |
25 |
40 |
|
60 |
40 |
25 |
30 |
35 |
45 |
20 |
25 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
45 |
|
2 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
|
5 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
Hank Baskett/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Riley Cooper |
170 |
|
25 |
0 |
30 |
0 |
20 |
0 |
0 |
|
20 |
25 |
0 |
0 |
35 |
0 |
0 |
15 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
9 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brent Celek |
1050 |
+ |
55 |
75 |
85 |
40 |
45 |
50 |
100 |
|
55 |
65 |
80 |
100 |
85 |
70 |
80 |
65 |
Re TD |
8 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
88 |
|
4 |
5 |
7 |
3 |
4 |
6 |
8 |
|
5 |
6 |
7 |
10 |
7 |
5 |
6 |
5 |
|
Run: Unlike just about any other
team in the NFL, the Eagles are annually one team that appears
to be content with not having a RB run for 1,000 yards. In fact,
only twice since 2003 has a Philadelphia RB (Brian Westbrook)
accomplished the feat. So, as the Eagles move forward without
Westbrook for the first time in nine seasons, it seems unlikely
the team will send another RB to the 1,000-yard club in 2010 –
especially since Vick figures to steal a few opportunities each
week. Because so much of the fantasy value Eagles RBs can possess
is tied into the passing game, I will divert from my usual path
of analyzing the entire schedule and simply direct your attention
to the matchups I believe McCoy and Bell can take advantage of
this season.
Detroit and Jacksonville (Weeks 2-3) should each be improved
vs. the run this season, but lack the overall talent and depth
from front to back to be a good bet to hold up against a team
that is willing to commit to running the ball. (In the Eagles’
case, this often only occurs when they are trying to close out
the game in the final minutes.) Week 6 offers another opportunity
for Philadelphia to run the ball at home vs. a suspect Falcons’
run-stopping defense. At this point, only one Atlanta front-seven
defender – MLB Curtis Lofton – can be considered an
above-average talent as a defender in the run game. Beyond those
three contests, the Eagles’ run game figures to be a hit-or-miss
proposition against what projects to be one of the league’s
toughest run schedules.
Pass: While many expect Jackson
and Celek to alternate as Kolb’s favorite target each week,
I find it hard to believe that the TE (and Kolb's best friend
on the team) won't hold a significant lead in the reception department
at season's end. Kolb's first start as the team's unquestioned
QB1 couldn't be much tougher than it is in Week 1 when the Eagles
host the Packers and DC Dom Capers' zone blitz schemes. The next
two weeks should offer less of a challenge as neither Detroit
nor Jacksonville has the safety play or pass rush to contain Jackson
all game long. (Although the Lions’ Louis Delmas is a future
star, the Lions lack the pass rush.) The difficulty of the schedule
ratchets back up as the Redskins and Niners (Weeks 4-5) bring
their 3-4 defenses (and what could be above-average pass defenses),
meaning Kolb may struggle in three of his first five games out
of the gate. Atlanta and Tennessee (Weeks 6-7) are interesting
back-to-back contests for the Eagles in that both defenses feature
upper-echelon CBs (Dunta Robinson and Cortland Finnegan), but
lack many of the other necessary parts to do much more than shut
down just one aspect of the Eagles' offense, meaning Maclin and
Celek should be in line for solid games.
The second-half slate is not pleasant coming out of the bye for
Philly as it plays four consecutive games against some of the
best individual pass rushers and/or pass defenses the league can
offer. In addition to Dwight Freeney and Robert Mathis (and the
stingy Colts' pass defense) in Week 9, the Eagles must face the
3-4 OLB duo of Andre Carter and Brian Orakpo (Week 10), the Giants'
plethora of athletic DEs (Week 11) and a Julius Peppers-led Bears'
defense (that loves to blitz) in Week 12 that will be one of the
league's best overall defenses if it can just stay healthy. After
that long run of difficult opponents, Philadelphia must hold up
against two more teams from Texas that figure to be heavy-blitzing
defenses as well. Whereas the Eagles may be able to take advantage
of a young Texans' secondary (Week 13), it's doubtful Philly will
enjoy much success against the talented Cowboys' pass defense
one week later. Along with Dallas game, the fantasy playoff schedule
wraps up with another poor matchup against the Giants on the road
in Week 15 and a Vikings' defense that will make the Eagles even
more of a one-dimensional offense than they already are.
Washington Redskins |
|
Totals |
|
DAL |
HOU |
STL |
PHI |
GB |
IND |
CHI |
DET |
bye |
PHI |
TEN |
MIN |
NYG |
TB |
DAL |
JAX |
(Run) |
|
|
8.8 |
7.8 |
6.2 |
8 |
9.4 |
7.6 |
8.3 |
6.4 |
|
8 |
7.8 |
9.4 |
8.3 |
6.2 |
8.8 |
6.7 |
(Pass) |
|
|
7.8 |
7.5 |
6.4 |
8.2 |
8.3 |
8.8 |
8.3 |
5.8 |
|
8.2 |
7.5 |
8.2 |
8.9 |
6.4 |
7.8 |
7.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Donovan McNabb |
3330 |
|
275 |
230 |
255 |
250 |
170 |
215 |
225 |
350 |
|
240 |
INJ |
INJ |
215 |
330 |
240 |
335 |
TD |
18 |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
|
1 |
INJ |
INJ |
2 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
INT |
10 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
INJ |
INJ |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
Ru Yards |
155 |
|
15 |
10 |
0 |
15 |
15 |
25 |
5 |
0 |
|
20 |
INJ |
INJ |
20 |
10 |
20 |
0 |
Ru TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
INJ |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rex Grossman |
510 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
245 |
265 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
INT |
4 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinton Portis |
865 |
|
55 |
70 |
45 |
55 |
55 |
60 |
35 |
45 |
|
80 |
35 |
25 |
65 |
110 |
75 |
55 |
Ru TD |
5 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
205 |
|
10 |
20 |
0 |
15 |
5 |
5 |
0 |
30 |
|
15 |
25 |
30 |
5 |
0 |
15 |
30 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
29 |
|
2 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
|
2 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Johnson |
710 |
|
40 |
45 |
80 |
35 |
20 |
45 |
55 |
65 |
|
30 |
25 |
50 |
45 |
60 |
35 |
80 |
Ru TD |
5 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
100 |
|
5 |
10 |
15 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
20 |
0 |
|
5 |
15 |
5 |
0 |
15 |
5 |
0 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
15 |
|
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
|
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Santana Moss |
900 |
|
100 |
55 |
80 |
35 |
40 |
35 |
75 |
65 |
|
55 |
40 |
30 |
85 |
50 |
70 |
85 |
Re TD |
6 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
70 |
|
6 |
5 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
6 |
5 |
|
4 |
3 |
3 |
7 |
4 |
6 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joey Galloway |
390 |
|
30 |
15 |
35 |
15 |
30 |
0 |
45 |
20 |
|
25 |
0 |
45 |
25 |
60 |
25 |
20 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
24 |
|
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
|
2 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Wade |
360 |
|
20 |
15 |
0 |
20 |
15 |
35 |
0 |
45 |
|
30 |
45 |
25 |
0 |
35 |
30 |
45 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
31 |
|
2 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
4 |
|
2 |
4 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Devin Thomas |
520 |
|
15 |
45 |
25 |
50 |
20 |
40 |
20 |
65 |
|
0 |
30 |
45 |
25 |
60 |
30 |
50 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
38 |
|
1 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
|
0 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
2 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Cooley |
970 |
|
70 |
55 |
75 |
85 |
40 |
65 |
65 |
90 |
|
65 |
65 |
45 |
55 |
85 |
45 |
65 |
Re TD |
7 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
85 |
|
5 |
4 |
7 |
6 |
4 |
6 |
8 |
6 |
|
5 |
7 |
4 |
6 |
7 |
4 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fred Davis |
395 |
+ |
25 |
15 |
25 |
30 |
15 |
35 |
0 |
35 |
|
45 |
25 |
40 |
20 |
25 |
20 |
40 |
Re TD |
4 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
36 |
|
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
|
4 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
Run: Let’s cut right to the
chase; the next time someone figures out what goes on in the mind
of HC Mike Shanahan in regards to his RB usage may be the first
time it has happened since the days of Terrell Davis and a young
Portis. Since Portis and Johnson are both now on the wrong end
of the RB clock, the RB situation may be more confusing than ever.
And while the Redskins have – for all intents and purposes
– solved their long-term offensive tackle problems this
offseason, the interior of the line remains an issue, meaning
the days of 5.0+ YPC from a Shanahan RB may be a year or two away.
The schedule does no favors in that regard either as only St.
Louis (Week 3) can be considered a good matchup in the Redskins’
eight pre-bye games. Dallas is a poor matchup to kick off the
season and Houston (Week 2) has enough talent – even minus
OLB Brian Cushing – to contain the lack of game-breaking
ability the Washington RBs possess. The next three weeks see the
Redskins take on a pair of electric offensive teams that may not
allow Washington to get its running game started; even if the
Week 5 game is low-scoring, it may not matter with the Packers
being an elite run-stopping team. The pre-bye slate closes with
two road games, the first of which is against a Bears’ team
that could easily live up to my expectation as a top-10 run-stopping
unit. However, Week 8 in Detroit should be more palatable for
the Washington run game, although it may only be useful for fantasy
owners if Shanahan has chosen a lead RB at that point.
Whatever confidence may be gained against the Lions may get lost
in the grueling four-week stretch after the bye. While I have
the Eagles and Titans (Weeks 10-11) rated as average rush defenses,
both have high ceilings in that regard. The Vikings and Giants
(Weeks 12-13), on the other hand, should be elite and near-elite
vs. the run, respectively. The fantasy playoff matchups in Weeks
14 and 16 are winnable matchups for the Redskins. Even though
the Bucs and Jags each should sport a young and improving defense,
it is a stretch to believe either team will skyrocket up the rush
defense rankings this season with an overall lack of proven playmakers.
Those two matchups sandwich another red matchup in Dallas (Week
15). Therefore, with a schedule that shows 40% of the teams the
Redskins will face this season will be difficult to run against
and a coach that is known for his quick trigger-finger when it
comes to RBs, it seems like a bad bet that either Portis or Johnson
will have anything more than RB3/flex potential in most leagues.
Pass: What is clear is that Shanahan
will be able to do more for Donovan McNabb than ex-HC Jim Zorn
was ever able to do for Jason Campbell. In Shanahan’s system,
McNabb will be able to advantage of his underutilized mobility
with frequent throws on the move as the coach likes to roll his
signal-callers out in order to better sell the run as well as
buy time for his QB when he does is using play-action. What is
not so clear is whether McNabb is able to overcome his supporting
cast, which features a 31-year-old speed WR (Moss) – who
typically fades in the second half of the season – and little
else at receiver. McNabb will have a pair of solid TEs to throw
to, so he may not be in such bad shape, even if the Redskins will
struggle to create big plays in the passing game. Thankfully,
Washington invested in its offensive line in the offseason, so
it can withstand a rough first-half slate that starts on a Sunday
night at home vs. the Cowboys. Unlike the first game, Houston
and St. Louis (Weeks 2-3) should allow Shanahan to execute his
offensive vision for the Redskins against a young defense (the
Texans) minus Rookie of the Year OLB Brian Cushing and a defense
still at least a year away from being a respectable overall defense
(the Rams). After that, McNabb faces his old team (which should
qualify as the first of four straight red matchups for the passing
game if not for the fact that he should know every aspect of his
former team’s defense) in Week 4 before the Packers, Colts
and Bears complete a run of defenses that will determine the direction
of the Redskins’ season.
Washington should catch a break and perhaps some offensive momentum
in the passing game right before the bye against a Lions’
secondary that may be forced to start some combination of Chris
Houston, ex-Rams castoff Jonathan Wade, an aging Dre’ Bly
or rookie Amari Spievey. The much-anticipated rematch with the
Eagles takes place following the Week 9 bye in what could easily
be the first of three contests in which McNabb and Cooley hook
up with great frequency. Over the final quarter of the fantasy
season, fantasy owners may be surprised the Redskins may offer
some degree of help for fantasy owners looking for late-season
assistance. Granted, the Giants and Cowboys (Weeks 13 and 15)
are poor matchups for all parties, but McNabb should enjoy hosting
the Bucs in Week 14 and playing in Florida against the Jags in
Week 16 – two teams that have enough talent in the secondary
to contain the Redskins’ WRs, but lack the talent at LB
and S needed to cover Washington’s TEs.
NFC NORTH
Chicago Bears |
|
Totals |
|
DET |
DAL |
GB |
NYG |
CAR |
SEA |
WAS |
bye |
BUF |
MIN |
MIA |
PHI |
DET |
NE |
MIN |
NYJ |
(Run) |
|
|
6.4 |
8.8 |
9.4 |
8.3 |
5.8 |
7.5 |
8.2 |
|
6.1 |
9.4 |
7.2 |
8 |
6.4 |
7.4 |
9.4 |
9.1 |
(Pass) |
|
|
5.8 |
7.8 |
8.3 |
8.9 |
7.1 |
8 |
7.4 |
|
6.7 |
8.2 |
8 |
8.2 |
5.8 |
7.5 |
8.2 |
9.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jay Cutler |
4145 |
|
300 |
300 |
220 |
305 |
205 |
315 |
285 |
|
250 |
375 |
230 |
300 |
305 |
240 |
355 |
160 |
TD |
28 |
|
3 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
|
2 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
INT |
20 |
|
0 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
|
2 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
Ru Yards |
160 |
|
5 |
10 |
5 |
20 |
10 |
0 |
15 |
|
5 |
15 |
10 |
25 |
5 |
10 |
10 |
15 |
Ru TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Forte |
860 |
|
60 |
35 |
65 |
50 |
100 |
40 |
65 |
|
75 |
35 |
50 |
60 |
55 |
80 |
55 |
35 |
Ru TD |
5 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
365 |
|
30 |
20 |
10 |
25 |
15 |
10 |
25 |
|
40 |
55 |
20 |
15 |
35 |
25 |
30 |
10 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
46 |
|
4 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
|
4 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
5 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chester Taylor |
580 |
|
35 |
50 |
35 |
35 |
70 |
45 |
30 |
|
30 |
35 |
30 |
45 |
60 |
35 |
30 |
15 |
Ru TD |
4 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Re Yards |
225 |
|
15 |
25 |
5 |
15 |
10 |
30 |
10 |
|
10 |
20 |
10 |
25 |
15 |
10 |
15 |
10 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
29 |
|
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Devin Hester |
840 |
+ |
55 |
70 |
45 |
90 |
40 |
60 |
70 |
|
40 |
100 |
50 |
25 |
80 |
40 |
75 |
0 |
Re TD |
5 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
55 |
|
3 |
5 |
3 |
6 |
3 |
5 |
4 |
|
2 |
5 |
4 |
2 |
6 |
1 |
6 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Johnny Knox |
890 |
^ |
80 |
70 |
65 |
55 |
50 |
100 |
45 |
|
30 |
65 |
25 |
35 |
90 |
35 |
120 |
25 |
Re TD |
6 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
54 |
|
5 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
6 |
2 |
|
2 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
6 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Devin Aromashodu |
900 |
+ |
75 |
55 |
40 |
70 |
35 |
85 |
65 |
|
45 |
85 |
40 |
110 |
40 |
60 |
50 |
45 |
Re TD |
7 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
65 |
|
6 |
5 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
6 |
5 |
|
4 |
6 |
2 |
7 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earl Bennett |
455 |
|
20 |
35 |
25 |
15 |
40 |
10 |
25 |
|
35 |
40 |
50 |
30 |
25 |
45 |
35 |
25 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
38 |
|
1 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
|
3 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
B Manumaleuna/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Desmond Clark |
80 |
|
0 |
15 |
0 |
10 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
|
5 |
0 |
10 |
20 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
11 |
|
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg Olsen |
390 |
! |
25 |
10 |
30 |
25 |
10 |
20 |
35 |
|
45 |
10 |
25 |
40 |
20 |
20 |
30 |
45 |
Re TD |
4 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
33 |
|
2 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
4 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
|
Note: It is important to remember that Chicago will represent
the first cold-weather stop new OC Mike Martz will make since becoming
a NFL coordinator. Detroit and St. Louis both play indoors while
San Francisco cannot really be considered a cold-weather city even
though Candlestick Park can get chilly late in the season. I mention
this only to suggest that Martz may be forced to call more run plays
than he usually does during the fantasy playoffs. Run:
If ever there was a time and a team to heed my advice when it
comes to schedule analysis, the 2010 Bears would be it. While
the run game already figured to be an afterthought once Chicago
hired OC Mike Martz this offseason, the schedule maker did fantasy
owners one better – but we’ll get to that in a bit.
Because fantasy owners know what Martz means to a running game,
it makes it very difficult to award any green matchups to Forte
or Taylor simply because it’s not certain the new OC will
take advantage of such a matchup. Nevertheless, the season kicks
off with a solid run game matchup vs. Detroit before getting difficult
in a hurry in Weeks 2-4 against Dallas, Green Bay and the New
York Giants – three teams that should have more than enough
ammunition to keep the Bears’ running game in check. The
schedule quickly reverses course against the team I project to
have the worst run defense (Carolina) and a home game against
a team (Seattle) which almost always seems to experience a significant
drop-off in its play away from Qwest Field. Washington (Week 7)
projects to be the fourth pre-bye team that has a defense capable
of stuffing Forte and Taylor.
Another potential great run matchup awaits Forte and Taylor in
Week 9 at Buffalo, but it is hard to find a defense for Forte
and Taylor to thrive against until Week 13 potentially, and even
that is a tough sell because I expect the Lions’ run defense
to get significantly better as the season progresses. And, then,
that’s when it gets downright dreadful for the Bears. While
the pass game will certainly be affected by the quality of opponents
during the fantasy playoffs, it is the run game that will take
the biggest hit. Facing a Bill Belichick defense in Week 14 is
never a pleasant thought, but seeing two of the top-five run defenses
in the final two weeks of the fantasy season is enough to severely
downgrade Forte and Taylor as it is highly unlikely either will
help fantasy owners take home their league title in Weeks 15-16.
Pass: If the 2010 Bears hope to
emulate “The Greatest Show on Turf” Rams that Martz
oversaw in St. Louis, we have to know where everyone stands. Knox
is locked into the Torry Holt’s old split end role of the
offense while Hester is being groomed for Isaac Bruce’s
flanker spot. Aromashodu is being prepped for all three positions
(including the slot), but the team would like to see Hester return
kicks and punts. Not only that, Martz envisions Hester in more
of an Az Hakim role (who drew a lot of special teams work as you
may recall). So, sometime before the end of the season, Knox should
be Holt, Aromashodu should be Bruce (if he can stay healthy) and
Hester should be Hakim. Just for good measure, Bennett should
play the role of Ricky Proehl…got all that?
The season begins with what could be an aerial circus for both
teams at home vs. Detroit. It quickly turns sour in Weeks 2-4,
though, as the Cowboys, Packers and Giants will have a chance
to harass Cutler all day behind a shaky pass-blocking line. Carolina
(Week 5) is talented enough in the secondary to cause the Bears
WRs some problems, but the Panthers will struggle all season long
to generate pressure on the QB, so the deep drops required in
a Martz offense may not open Cutler to all that much punishment.
Seattle and Washington (Weeks 6-7) are consecutive home games
for the Bears, the former which should play out much like the
Carolina game. The latter contest, on the other hand, may remind
Chicago of its rough three-game stretch in Weeks 2-4. The second
half of the slate starts well for the Bears as neither the Bills
(Week 9) nor the Vikings (Week 10) may have enough depth in the
secondary to contend with the likes of Hester, Knox and Aromashodu.
However, Miami and Philadelphia (Weeks 11-12) should be more than
capable of generating pressure on the QB and holding up long enough
in coverage to make it a long and taxing day for Cutler. Detroit
(Week 13) may allow Chicago to find its bearings once again, but
good luck against the Belichick-coached Patriots, a road game
against the Vikings and the Jets (Weeks 14-16).
Detroit Lions |
|
Totals |
|
CHI |
PHI |
MIN |
GB |
STL |
NYG |
bye |
WAS |
NYJ |
BUF |
DAL |
NE |
CHI |
GB |
TB |
MIA |
(Run) |
|
|
8.3 |
8 |
9.4 |
9.4 |
6.2 |
8.3 |
|
8.2 |
9.1 |
6.1 |
8.8 |
7.4 |
8.3 |
9.4 |
6.2 |
7.2 |
(Pass) |
|
|
8.3 |
8.2 |
8.2 |
8.3 |
6.4 |
8.9 |
|
7.4 |
9.7 |
6.7 |
7.8 |
7.5 |
8.3 |
8.3 |
6.4 |
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Stafford |
3760 |
^ |
280 |
270 |
235 |
215 |
310 |
260 |
|
255 |
190 |
255 |
205 |
190 |
295 |
240 |
310 |
250 |
TD |
24 |
|
2 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
|
1 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
INT |
18 |
|
1 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
|
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jahvid Best |
1035 |
+ |
60 |
85 |
40 |
55 |
120 |
70 |
|
60 |
35 |
135 |
65 |
INJ |
85 |
55 |
110 |
60 |
Ru TD |
5 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
INJ |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Re Yards |
340 |
|
40 |
20 |
10 |
35 |
15 |
30 |
|
10 |
15 |
35 |
15 |
INJ |
25 |
15 |
55 |
20 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
40 |
|
5 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
|
2 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
INJ |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Smith |
345 |
|
15 |
10 |
10 |
20 |
15 |
25 |
|
20 |
10 |
10 |
35 |
70 |
25 |
35 |
20 |
25 |
Ru TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
105 |
|
5 |
5 |
0 |
5 |
10 |
5 |
|
10 |
0 |
10 |
15 |
20 |
5 |
10 |
5 |
0 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
15 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calvin Johnson |
1225 |
|
115 |
80 |
80 |
55 |
150 |
80 |
|
90 |
30 |
90 |
70 |
INJ |
100 |
120 |
100 |
65 |
Re TD |
11 |
|
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
INJ |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
80 |
|
7 |
5 |
7 |
4 |
8 |
5 |
|
6 |
2 |
8 |
6 |
INJ |
5 |
8 |
5 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nate Burleson |
860 |
|
50 |
65 |
70 |
40 |
55 |
35 |
|
60 |
50 |
35 |
80 |
75 |
40 |
60 |
65 |
80 |
Re TD |
5 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
63 |
|
3 |
5 |
6 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
|
5 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
6 |
3 |
3 |
6 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bryant Johnson |
300 |
|
20 |
30 |
0 |
30 |
25 |
35 |
|
0 |
20 |
25 |
0 |
35 |
35 |
0 |
30 |
15 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
17 |
|
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brandon Pettigrew |
360 |
|
15 |
20 |
35 |
15 |
25 |
45 |
|
30 |
35 |
20 |
0 |
25 |
30 |
15 |
10 |
40 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
36 |
|
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
|
3 |
5 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tony Scheffler |
570 |
^ |
35 |
50 |
40 |
35 |
30 |
30 |
|
55 |
40 |
40 |
25 |
35 |
60 |
20 |
45 |
30 |
Re TD |
5 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
47 |
|
3 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
|
5 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
|
Run: In my estimation, a true fantasy
RB2 is a player who has the ability to almost single-handedly
carry his fantasy owners to victory some weeks, but is too inconsistent
to be considered a RB1. Combining his recent injury history college
with the (small) threat of Smith stealing important carries from
him at some point; it becomes pretty clear that Best will be a
“true” RB2 in fantasy this season, especially after
analyzing the schedule. The rookie draws no breaks over the first
quarter of the season as the Bears, Eagles, Vikings and Packers
all should have (or already possess) above-average to elite run
defenses. Best should scorch a slower Rams defense in Week 5,
but the Giants could easily be the fifth of six teams before the
bye that could bottle up the speedster.
Little changes after the Week 7 bye as three of the next four
opponents each have a 3-4 defense that could easily overwhelm
the Lions’ average run-blocking line (Redskins, Jets and
Cowboys). However, the first two of those games are at home and
should serve as good preparation for the one team in that stretch
that doesn’t figure to be all that great at stopping the
run (Buffalo), another 3-4 defense. New England (Week 12) and
Chicago (Week 13) could also give Best fits before the Lions must
play host to the difficult Packers’ defense once again in
Week 14. Almost as a reward for playing such a difficult stretch
of defenses, the schedule allows Detroit to finish up its fantasy
schedule in the state of Florida in games vs. Tampa Bay (Week
15) and Miami (Week 16). Although Miami’s defense should
be up to the task of bottling up Best, the rookie’s speed
could easily overwhelm the Bucs.
Pass: It is my opinion that Johnson
could easily become this generation’s Randy Moss (and then
some), but in order for that to happen, “Megatron”
needs to stay healthy. As the team’s offensive centerpiece
and with an improved supporting cast, he’ll certainly have
the opportunity. Only one game (against Revis) should lead to
definite struggles for his fantasy numbers, although there are
a number of solid CBs the Lions must face this season. The early
going is not easy, however, for the Lions’ offensive line,
which must face Julius Peppers, Trent Cole and Jared Allen in
the first three games of the season. If they can stand up to that
trio of pass rushers, it bodes well for the Lions when they take
on Green Bay’s high-pressure, turnover-forcing defense in
Week 4. The schedule provides Detroit a chance to lick its wounds
in Week 5 against a weak Rams pass rush and secondary, but sends
the team right back into the fire against what figures to be another
top pass-rush unit in the Giants in the week before the bye.
The Lions open up the second-half schedule facing four consecutive
3-4 defenses (Weeks 8-11, three of which will test the improvement
the offensive line made over the first half of the season. New
England and Chicago (Weeks 12-13) each have the defensive minds
in place to slow down Detroit’s passing game, but it is
doubtful that either opponent has an answer for Johnson now that
the Lions have players like Burleson and Scheffler who can make
defenses pay for double- and triple-teaming Johnson. Green Bay
(Week 14) ends Detroit’s run of three straight home games
but also may not have the pieces necessary to control all of the
Lions’ weapons, while the Bucs (Weeks 15) probably don’t
possess the pass-rush capabilities needed to harass Stafford.
The fantasy season ends with a road test against what should be
a difficult road matchup vs. DC Mike Nolan’s Dolphins defense.
Miami possesses the CBs necessary to stay with Johnson and Burleson,
but may not be able to solve Scheffler. So, if it isn’t
apparent by now, two things must happen for Detroit to become
the land of fantasy opportunity: 1) Stafford must take the leap
the Lions believe he can and be able to make quicker decisions
and 2) the line must be much improved, which will be helped by
Best and a more experienced Stafford.
Green Bay Packers |
|
Totals |
|
PHI |
BUF |
CHI |
DET |
WAS |
MIA |
MIN |
NYJ |
DAL |
bye |
MIN |
ATL |
SF |
DET |
NE |
NYG |
(Run) |
|
|
8 |
6.1 |
8.3 |
6.4 |
8.2 |
7.2 |
9.4 |
9.1 |
8.8 |
|
9.4 |
6.6 |
8.9 |
6.4 |
7.4 |
8.3 |
(Pass) |
|
|
8.2 |
6.7 |
8.3 |
5.8 |
7.4 |
8 |
8.2 |
9.7 |
7.8 |
|
8.2 |
7.7 |
7.9 |
5.8 |
7.5 |
8.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aaron Rodgers |
4340 |
|
315 |
240 |
225 |
330 |
325 |
270 |
345 |
210 |
270 |
|
335 |
325 |
235 |
305 |
270 |
340 |
TD |
29 |
|
3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
|
2 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
INT |
10 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Ru Yards |
305 |
|
20 |
5 |
30 |
10 |
25 |
15 |
25 |
20 |
25 |
|
40 |
10 |
30 |
10 |
25 |
15 |
Ru TD |
4 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan Grant |
1115 |
|
55 |
115 |
65 |
75 |
60 |
80 |
55 |
40 |
65 |
|
75 |
120 |
80 |
75 |
65 |
90 |
Ru TD |
10 |
|
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
210 |
|
10 |
0 |
20 |
5 |
25 |
15 |
40 |
20 |
0 |
|
15 |
0 |
10 |
10 |
25 |
15 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
22 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
|
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brandon Jackson |
120 |
|
15 |
0 |
5 |
20 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
|
0 |
5 |
20 |
30 |
5 |
0 |
Ru TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
160 |
|
20 |
10 |
10 |
0 |
0 |
35 |
15 |
10 |
5 |
|
5 |
10 |
15 |
20 |
5 |
0 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
22 |
|
3 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
|
1 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James Starks |
260 |
^ |
15 |
15 |
10 |
20 |
25 |
10 |
20 |
35 |
25 |
|
10 |
15 |
INJ |
INJ |
45 |
15 |
Ru TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
INJ |
INJ |
1 |
0 |
Re Yards |
185 |
|
10 |
0 |
5 |
10 |
15 |
5 |
0 |
15 |
25 |
|
25 |
35 |
INJ |
INJ |
15 |
25 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
INJ |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
17 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
|
2 |
2 |
INJ |
INJ |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg Jennings |
1065 |
|
80 |
100 |
40 |
120 |
70 |
55 |
60 |
20 |
80 |
|
75 |
90 |
40 |
70 |
110 |
55 |
Re TD |
8 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
72 |
|
6 |
4 |
3 |
7 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
2 |
5 |
|
5 |
6 |
3 |
6 |
7 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Donald Driver |
760 |
! |
40 |
50 |
35 |
70 |
55 |
65 |
40 |
40 |
55 |
|
100 |
70 |
35 |
25 |
35 |
45 |
Re TD |
4 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
58 |
|
3 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
4 |
6 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
|
6 |
5 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James Jones |
405 |
|
25 |
0 |
30 |
50 |
35 |
40 |
55 |
0 |
45 |
|
15 |
0 |
20 |
50 |
0 |
40 |
Re TD |
4 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
22 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jordy Nelson |
480 |
+ |
50 |
20 |
10 |
15 |
45 |
0 |
35 |
55 |
25 |
|
35 |
30 |
15 |
60 |
40 |
45 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
40 |
|
3 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
|
3 |
3 |
1 |
6 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jermichael Finley |
1075 |
^ |
80 |
60 |
75 |
60 |
80 |
55 |
100 |
50 |
35 |
|
65 |
90 |
100 |
70 |
40 |
115 |
Re TD |
11 |
|
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
Rec |
81 |
|
6 |
5 |
7 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
6 |
3 |
4 |
|
5 |
6 |
8 |
5 |
3 |
8 |
|
Run: Anyone who has been a Grant
owner over the past three seasons already knows that he has been
a second-half (of the season) runner. Judging by the schedule,
he may not get much of a chance to do it again. Grant may be a
bit hit-or-miss during the first quarter of the fantasy slate,
though, as Green Bay will alternate potentially poor matchups
in Weeks 1 and 3 with green matchups in Weeks 2 and 4. Given the
fact that Grant should never see a loaded box with all the weapons
the team has in the passing game, he could easily run through
the Eagles and Bears’ defenses as well if he doesn’t
need eight games to “warm up” in 2010. Washington
and Miami (Weeks 5-6) both possess 3-4 defenses which should serve
as a good indication as to how the Packers will fare against the
most brutal part of their run schedule (Weeks 7, 8, 9 and 11).
In facing the Vikings (twice), Jets and Cowboys, Green Bay will
play four consecutive contests against defenses I have projected
as top-five run-stopping units. Even with Rodgers as the centerpiece
of this offense, expect Grant to struggle mightily during this
time and defer to the passing game.
Week 12 may offer the Packers’ ground attack a one-week
reprieve – although a road game in Atlanta may be a shootout
in which the run game suffers yet again – before Green Bay
is forced the face the sixth-best run defense (according to my
defensive efficiency ratings) in the Niners, although that contest
is at Lambeau Field. In Week 14, the Packers draw a Lions defense
that should be much improved over last season vs. the run, but
one that Grant should have some success against. The weather –
as it usually does – figures to play a pivotal role in the
game-planning of the Packers’ offense in Weeks 15 and 16
when they first travel to New England before returning home and
hosting the Giants. Even though the Pats and Giants should both
field respectable run defenses, expect Grant to see enough carries
in both games to be productive in fantasy. Without sounding like
a broken record, defenses will have to give Green Bay the running
game in many cases because the passing attack is so good. Combine
that with Grant’s history as a November and December standout
and fantasy owners should have themselves a solid RB2.
Pass: Rodgers is the epitome of
a fantasy QB: he is accurate, mobile, durable and plays in an
offense perfectly suited for him. His passing numbers since becoming
the starter speak for themselves and, while he’s not the
best athlete, he knows when to run and does a good job at being
productive in that area of his game. But what makes him so good
is that his combination of supporting cast and running ability
make him a good bet for jaw-dropping fantasy numbers each week,
almost regardless of the opponent. Thus, only the projected best
defense in the NFL this season (the Jets, Week 8) makes the cut
as a red matchup for Rodgers this season. And to be honest, there
isn’t a defense in the league that can legitimately cover
the wealth of gifted receivers the Packers have (Jennings, Driver,
Jones, Nelson and now Finley) all game long. As a result, Rodgers
is just about as much as a lock for fantasy production this season
as an owner can hope for from any QB this year.
As the receivers go, Weeks 6-9 represent the only truly difficult
part of the season. Miami’s two athletic CBs (Vontae Davis,
Sean Smith) are more than capable of locking down Driver and Jennings,
but don’t figure to have an answer for Finley. The Jets
(Week 8) do have the overall personnel and scheme and represent
the one bump in the road for the Packers, but the other difficult
matchup – the Cowboys in Week 9 – must play Green
Bay at Lambeau Field. The only other challenge is one that no
one can reasonably predict – how treacherous will the weather
be in Weeks 15 (when the Packers visit the Pats) and 16 (when
they host the Giants)? As we have learned, wind is a major consideration
in these cold-weather contests. But talk of the elements aside,
I believe I may be underselling Rodgers’ numbers above because
he is line for a huge season. On the other hand, I feel pretty
confident in Finley’s ability to hit the numbers I forecasted
for him.
Minnesota Vikings |
|
Totals |
|
NO |
MIA |
DET |
bye |
NYJ |
DAL |
GB |
NE |
ARI |
CHI |
GB |
WAS |
BUF |
NYG |
CHI |
PHI |
(Run) |
|
|
7.4 |
7.2 |
6.4 |
|
9.1 |
8.8 |
9.4 |
7.4 |
8.5 |
8.3 |
9.4 |
8.2 |
6.1 |
8.3 |
8.3 |
8 |
(Pass) |
|
|
7.8 |
8 |
5.8 |
|
9.7 |
7.8 |
8.3 |
7.5 |
7.4 |
8.3 |
8.3 |
7.4 |
6.7 |
8.9 |
8.3 |
8.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brett Favre |
3755 |
! |
285 |
250 |
275 |
|
160 |
180 |
270 |
230 |
305 |
300 |
235 |
265 |
200 |
285 |
240 |
275 |
TD |
26 |
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
INT |
13 |
|
2 |
1 |
0 |
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adrian Peterson |
1400 |
|
110 |
80 |
110 |
|
65 |
85 |
65 |
100 |
50 |
110 |
90 |
80 |
150 |
70 |
130 |
105 |
Ru TD |
17 |
|
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
Re Yards |
435 |
|
30 |
40 |
25 |
|
25 |
10 |
15 |
20 |
50 |
25 |
15 |
65 |
20 |
35 |
25 |
35 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
46 |
|
4 |
3 |
2 |
|
5 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
6 |
1 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Toby Gerhart |
325 |
|
20 |
15 |
35 |
|
10 |
15 |
20 |
35 |
20 |
15 |
20 |
15 |
30 |
25 |
15 |
35 |
Ru TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
45 |
|
5 |
0 |
5 |
|
0 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
8 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percy Harvin |
130 |
|
15 |
0 |
10 |
|
5 |
0 |
5 |
15 |
25 |
0 |
10 |
INJ |
20 |
15 |
0 |
10 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
955 |
|
55 |
80 |
60 |
|
45 |
30 |
75 |
65 |
90 |
105 |
55 |
INJ |
45 |
80 |
70 |
100 |
Re TD |
7 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
INJ |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Rec |
66 |
|
4 |
6 |
5 |
|
3 |
2 |
5 |
4 |
7 |
6 |
4 |
INJ |
3 |
5 |
6 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sidney Rice |
1015 |
- |
45 |
55 |
65 |
|
15 |
80 |
50 |
100 |
45 |
75 |
65 |
110 |
80 |
70 |
100 |
60 |
Ru TD |
6 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
66 |
|
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
1 |
6 |
4 |
7 |
3 |
5 |
4 |
8 |
5 |
4 |
6 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bernard Berrian |
725 |
|
75 |
30 |
85 |
|
25 |
30 |
80 |
35 |
55 |
75 |
35 |
70 |
40 |
30 |
25 |
35 |
Re TD |
5 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
47 |
|
5 |
2 |
6 |
|
2 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
6 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Visanthe Shiancoe |
580 |
|
75 |
45 |
35 |
|
50 |
25 |
50 |
10 |
55 |
20 |
65 |
15 |
10 |
70 |
10 |
45 |
Re TD |
8 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
53 |
|
5 |
5 |
3 |
|
6 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
1 |
5 |
2 |
5 |
|
Run: If Peterson is going to take
the world by storm again this season, he’s going to have
to do it against the second-most difficult run schedule of the
teams we’ve analyzed so far (Miami has the toughest). And
whatever advantage Peterson gets in opportunity because the Vikes
allowed Chester Taylor to leave, the schedule more than makes
up for in unforgiving run defenses. AP should get off to a good
start, however, as Minnesota will be primed to give the Saints
a heavy dose of Peterson in the Superdome for the Thursday night
opener. Miami and DC Mike Nolan (Week 2) should be able to keep
the Minnesota ground game in check somewhat, but Detroit (Week
3) should be Peterson’s best chance to hit the century mark
– if he hasn’t done so already – before the
team’s early bye week.
In Weeks 5-7, the Vikings are faced with a threesome of 3-4 defenses
(all of which I have projected as in the top seven of rush defenses).
New England (Week 8) may offer a bit of break, although a healthy
Pats’ defense would likely force Favre to beat them. Another
3-4 defense (Arizona) that I have among the top 10 rush defenses
awaits Minnesota in Week 9, before Chicago – a team that
Peterson has torn apart in his short career – hosts the
Vikings in Week 10. Another meeting against the Packers follows
before Minnesota faces its sixth 3-4 defense post-bye on the road
at Washington. AP owners finally catch a break as the Vikings
host Buffalo’s porous run defense in Week 13 before closing
out with a trio of defenses which could all do a fair job at containing
Peterson in the fantasy playoffs. The schedule is enough for me
to downgrade AP to the back end of the first tier of RBs, meaning
he probably should be drafted behind Maurice Jones-Drew, Ray Rice
and Chris Johnson.
Pass: This passing game has complete
boom-or-bust potential this season. What do I mean? Does Favre
return? How bad is Rice’s hip? How often will Harvin’s
migranes bother him this season? Obviously, at this point of the
preseason, we’ll cover the best-case scenarios for Favre
and Harvin (because their situations are guesswork to say the
least) while maintaining skepticism regarding Rice (as just last
week HC Brad Childress stated he felt his WR was “a ways
away” from coming off active/PUP); thus, I’m predicting
a slow start from Rice. Unfortunately, the schedule doesn’t
give much of a break to the team many feel will be a Super Bowl
team this season. The season gets off to a rough start –
especially if Rice isn’t 100% - begins against a pair of
DCs in the Saints’ Gregg Williams and Dolphins’ Mike
Nolan who know a thing or two about bringing pressure. Both coordinators
also have the starting CBs necessary to lock up Rice and Berrian,
so Harvin may be a featured player in the first two weeks as well
as Shiancoe. Detroit (Week 3) should be a plus-matchup leading
into the bye, but Minnesota may be forced to lean on the run (something
they will probably do more this year anyway) more heavily if Rice
is still struggling to get back to full health.
Coming out of the bye, the passing game had better be healthy
because three of the nastiest defenses the league can offer will
be waiting. The Jets (Week 5), Cowboys (Week 6) and Packers (Week
7) all have the personnel to make the Vikings one-dimensional
if Rice or Harvin are limited or Favre is still somehow hampered
by his ankle. Although the Pats’ defense (Week 8) isn’t
what it used to be, they are still another formidable defense
that will also test Minnesota’s mettle. In fact, it isn’t
until the Bills Week 13 when the Vikings’ receivers can
honestly look at their schedule and find an opponent they should
dominate. The fantasy playoff run in Weeks 14-16 provides Minnesota
with a small break as the first two weeks are at home in the Metrodome,
but gives the team another run of potentially dangerous pass defenses.
In fact, the final three weeks of the fantasy slate are loaded
with defenses who figure to bring the blitz as much – if
not more – than any other team in the league this season.
Worse yet, all three defenses have the CBs necessary to severely
limit Rice’s potential fantasy playoff impact. Due to his
hip injury, the schedule and the attention he will generate as
the Vikings’ WR1, Rice should probably viewed as a fantasy
WR2 and may even be less productive than Harvin this season while
Favre should be expected to regress as well, if he even plays.
Suggestions, comments, musings about the article or fantasy football
in general? E-mail me.
|